A quarter century of public health research trends in developing countries: Bibliometric analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to identify the development of research theme trends that were carried out from 1999 to 2024. Thus, the study’s results can provide recommendations regarding research themes that can be developed to meet theoretical and practical needs. Researchers use bibliometric analysis to obtain the appropriate analysis. This analysis method can be developed to support the dynamic development of public health science with settings and researchers from developing countries, both through quantitative and qualitative interpretation. The analysis results show that over 25 years, public health science, from the perspective of researchers and developing countries, has experienced dynamic development. This change was driven by the emergence of various issues in society itself. For example, the 1999–2009 shows that lifestyle changes have resulted in multiple diseases. In the following period, the concept of sustainability emerged, which encouraged awareness of sustainable development and resource scarcity that would affect public health quality. As for the 2020–2024 period, the emergence of Covid 19 changed the previous research paradigm.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.030 | 0.114 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.104 | 0.232 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".